The lies about gen 6

theefaith said:

Even gen 6 begins by stating that men began procreating

Click to expand...

Yes it does, and then it shows that as MEN were busy procreating, teh "bene-elohim" saw that the daughters of all those men busy procresting took some women to be wives and intercourse with them and produced a hybrid race.

theefaith said:

nowhere does it say the giants came from fallen angels

verse one MEN BEGAN TO MULTIPLY!!!!!

Click to expand...

Yes it does!

4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men

That little word "when" tells us the cause of the nephilim being on the earth. It is simple grammar theefatih.

Ronald Nolette said:

Yes, in the New Testament era we are called the children of God. Why? because we are born again and have the spirit indwell us. This was not true in the Old Testament. God never called any of the pre Israelite saints "bene elohim", He also never called teh Israelites "bene elohim".

Click to expand...

Granted the following verse refers to failing Israelis, but it does prove that the term "sons of God" legitimately applied to men of Israel...

Psalm 82.6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’ 7 But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler.”

I completely disagree that Israel was not called a "son" by God.

Hos 11.1 “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son."

Ronald Nolette said:

remember, why would these "righteous sons of Seth" be called righteous if they married the unrighteous daughters of Cain? Were there no daughters of Seth? Were none of teh daughters of Seth fair?

Click to expand...

The term "sons of God" apparently was designed to show how improper it is for God's People to behave like ungodly people, by marrying them out of sexual desire. They were beautiful, and attracted God's people of faith, making them forget their oath of faith, and taking hold of things because of their desirability.

Ronald Nolette said:

And why would intercoujrse between two people produce the groups called the Nephilim, Gibborim and the men of fame?

Click to expand...

Each race has its own genius, and this group of people apparently placed a premium on mixing with physically dominating and physically desirable traits, as opposed to serving God with the variety of gifts He has given the human race. Its the evolution of self-will, brought on my carnal, selfish motives.

Ronald Nolette said:

also we see the spirits who left their first habitation (heaven) and left their first estate (arche) place of autrhority, are bound in chains of darkness for ever. These are not the demons who fell with Satan for they are still free. No these are the bene elohim- who left their habitation in heaven, left their first estate principality and magistracy, and came down and saw that women were beautiful, had sex and produced the hybrid race.

Click to expand...

I don't know where you would get your information for all this? We don't know any more than what Jude or Peter may have known about it? For all I know Satan fell before human history, causing some to be chained and others not. Some are apparently destined to be chained later, in particular at the 2nd Coming.

The sin of angels appears to be a matter of enticing men to make carnal decisions as they do themselves. They choose out of self-will, and not according to God's word. That's what caused Satan to leave his first estate. And he will be chained at the 2nd Coming. I don't know any more than this.

Randy Kluth said:

Psalm 82.6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”; you are all sons of the Most High.’ 7 But you will die like mere mortals; you will fall like every other ruler.”

I completely disagree that Israel was not called a "son" by God.

Hos 11.1 “When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son."

Click to expand...

This is far different than calling them "bene-elohim"

Randy Kluth said:

The term "sons of God" apparently was designed to show how improper it is for God's People to behave like ungodly people, by marrying them out of sexual desire. They were beautiful, and attracted God's people of faith, making them forget their oath of faith, and taking hold of things because of their desirability.

Click to expand...

Now you are adding all sorts of unfounded suppositions to the simple passage of Genesis 6. Now you have to make assumptions that all the "sons of god only married unrighteous womenj. Where the passage simply says that they were daughters of men. You have to allegorize the rest

Randy Kluth said:

Each race has its own genius, and this group of people apparently placed a premium on mixing with physically dominating and physically desirable traits, as opposed to serving God with the variety of gifts He has given the human race. Its the evolution of self-will, brought on my carnal, selfish motives.

Click to expand...

Now all you are doing is hypothesizing without real evidence. You are now adding hypothesis to hypothesis to this passage to reach your conclusion.

Randy Kluth said:

I don't know where you would get your information for all this? We don't know any more than what Jude or Peter may have known about it? For all I know Satan fell before human history, causing some to be chained and others not. Some are apparently destined to be chained later, in particular at the 2nd Coming.

The sin of angels appears to be a matter of enticing men to make carnal decisions as they do themselves. They choose out of self-will, and not according to God's word. That's what caused Satan to leave his first estate. And he will be chained at the 2nd Coming. I don't know any more than this.

Click to expand...

Satan fell after human history- God made all the host of creation in six days! You love the words apparently and appears and yet it does not appear at all.

the angels that joined Satan were part of a coup against god. These are angels who left their habitation and provenance. This is not true of the angels who joined satan. We know of nothing saying they are chained but we do know Ephesians six and the gospels that there are enormous amounts of fallen angels roaming the earth.

Once again it would be far easier and more sensible of a sensible God to say the righteoues men stopped being righteous and fell into sin. But inspiring a term used only two other times in the OT that is clearly defined as angels gives us confidence these are angels. god does not speak in code and leave it for us to "apparently" figure out.

theefaith said:

Pure spirits are no bodies
Therefore no sex

Click to expand...

Well don't tell that to Abraham when He saw jesus and two angles and fed them.

Don't tell that to Lot when He housed two angels.
Don't tell that to Mary who was vidsisted by a very physical Gabriel or the women at the tomb who saw two very physical angels.

Angles take on human form when they wish to work with us and be seen.

Angels in heaven and people in heaven do not have sex, but that doesn't preclude them having sex when they take on human form. And this passage prves they do.

Ronald Nolette said:

This is far different than calling them "bene-elohim"

Click to expand...

I don't know that it is. It may be a unique rendering, but is that unique rendering consistent with the Greek transliteration? Not being knowledgeable of the Bible languages, I would have to defer to you and to my brother, who is not presently accessible.

Ronald Nolette said:

Now you are adding all sorts of unfounded suppositions to the simple passage of Genesis 6. Now you have to make assumptions that all the "sons of god only married unrighteous womenj. Where the passage simply says that they were daughters of men. You have to allegorize the rest

Click to expand...

Not allegorization at all--simply reading between the lines.

Ronald Nolette said:

Now all you are doing is hypothesizing without real evidence. You are now adding hypothesis to hypothesis to this passage to reach your conclusion.

Click to expand...

Of course I'm hypothesizing! So are you!

Ronald Nolette said:

Satan fell after human history- God made all the host of creation in six days! You love the words apparently and appears and yet it does not appear at all.

Click to expand...

Another subject for another time. I believe Satan fell *before* the creation of mankind. Satan had already fallen at the time he tempted Adam, in my view.

Beyond this, nothing in the Bible speaks of the creation of angels that I can pinpoint with any certainty. The "host of heaven" may or may not refer to angels. What I do know is that much about them is not told us. And I can understand why--they tend to get into people's heads, just as they are now.

Ronald Nolette said:

the angels that joined Satan were part of a coup against god. These are angels who left their habitation and provenance. This is not true of the angels who joined satan. We know of nothing saying they are chained but we do know Ephesians six and the gospels that there are enormous amounts of fallen angels roaming the earth.

Click to expand...

Talk about guess-work! You get all this from the idea that some are presently chained, and some are not?

Ronald Nolette said:

Once again it would be far easier and more sensible of a sensible God to say the righteoues men stopped being righteous and fell into sin. But inspiring a term used only two other times in the OT that is clearly defined as angels gives us confidence these are angels. god does not speak in code and leave it for us to "apparently" figure out.

Click to expand...

Again, I disagree that the term used uniquely in this instance proves what you assume, that it refers to angels. The fact it is used elsewhere for angels does not close your case either, if indeed the reference here is to human beings.

I don't think you've made a substantial argument against the use of "God's children," or "God's People," as it relates thematically with the "sons of God" in this passage. The concern always is to prevent God's people of faith from mixing with pagans, who are part of races that thrive on violence. We are to avoid the external attractiveness and incline towards what is spiritual and godly. That's the lesson--not dabbling in angelology.

theefaith said:

there were giants in the earth in those days yes but it does not say they are the offspring of fallen Angels and earth women

there are still giants in the earth
Robert Wadlow
John Rogan
Jaws from James Bond etc.

Click to expand...

You're being silly.

23. "THE SONS OF GOD" IN GEN. 6:2, 4.




It is only by the Divine specific act of creation that any created being can be called "a son of God". For that which is "born of the flesh is flesh". God is spirit, and that which is "born of the Spirit is spirit" (John 3:6). Hence Adam is called a "son of God" in Luke 3:38. Those "in Christ" having "the new nature" which is by the direct creation of God (2Cor. 5:17. Eph. 2:10) can be, and are called "sons of God" (John 1:13. Rom. 8:14, 15. 1John 3:1). (*1)

This is why angels are called "sons of God" in every other place where the expression is used in the Old Testament. Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7. Ps. 29:1; 89:6. Dan. 3:25 (no art.). (*2) We have no authority or right to take the expression in Gen. 6:2, 4 in any other sense. Moreover, in Gen. 6:2 the Sept. renders it "angels". Angels are called "spirits" (Ps. 104:4. Heb. 1:7, 14), for spirits are created by God.

That there was a fall of the angels is certain from Jude 6.

• The nature of their fall is clearly stated in the same verse. They left their own oiketerion. This word occurs only in 2Cor. 5:2 and Jude 6, where it is used of the spiritual (or resurrection) body.
  
  
• The nature of their sin is stated to be "in like manner" to that of the subsequent sins of Sodom and Gomorrha, Jude 7.
  
  
• The time of their fall is given as having taken place "in the days of Noah" (1Pet. 3:20. 2Pet. 2:7), though there may have been a prior fall which caused the end of "the world that then was" (Gen. 1:1, 2. 2Pet. 3:6).
  
  
• For this sin they are "reserved unto judgment", 2Pet. 2:4, and are "in prison", 1Pet. 3:19.
  
  
• Their progeny, called Nephilim (translated "giants"), were monsters of iniquity; and, being superhuman in size and character, had to be destroyed (see Ap. 25). This was the one and only object of the Flood.
  
  
• Only Noah and his family had preserved their pedigree pure from Adam (Gen. 6:9, see note). All the rest had become "corrupt" (shachath) destroyed [as Adamites]. the only remedy was to destroy it (de facto), as it had become destroyed (de jure). (It is the same word in v. 17 as in vv. 11, 12.) See further under Ap. 25 on the Nephilim.

This irruption of fallen angels was Satan's first attempt to prevent the coming of the Seed of the woman foretold in gen. 3:15. If this could be accomplished, God's Word would have failed, and his own doom would be averted.
As soon as it was made known that the Seed of the woman was to come through ABRAHAM, there must have been another irruption, as recorded in Gen. 6:4, "and also after that" (i.e. after the days of Noah, more than 500 years after the first irruption). The aim of the enemy was to occupy Canaan in advance of Abraham, and so to contest its occupation by his seed. For, when Abraham entered Canaan, we read (Gen. 12:6) "the Canaanite was then (i.e. already) in the land."
In the same chapter (Gen. 12:10-20) we see Satan's next attempt to interfere with Abraham's seed, and frustrate the purpose of God that it should be in "Isaac". This attempt was repeated in 20:1-18.
This great conflict may be seen throughout the Bible, and it forms a great and important subject of Biblical study. In each case the human instrument had his own personal interest to serve, while Satan had his own great object in view. Hence God had, in each case, to interfere and avert the evil and the danger, of which his servants and people were wholly ignorant. The following assaults of the great Enemy stand out prominently :--

• The destruction of the chosen family by famine, Gen. 50:20.
  
  
• The destruction of the male line in Israel, Ex. 1:10, 15, &c. Cp. Ex. 2:5. Heb. 11:23.
  
  
• The destruction of the whole nation in Pharaoh's pursuit, Ex. 14.
  
  
• After David's line was singled out (2Sam. 7), that was the next selected for assault. Satan's first assault was in the union of Jehoram and Athaliah by Jehoshaphat, notwithstanding 2Chron. 17:1. Jehoram killed off all his brothers (2Chron. 21:4).
  
  
• The Arabians slew all his children, except Ahaziah (2Chron. 21:17; 22:1).
  
  
• When Ahaziah died, Athaliah killed "all the seed royal" (2Chron. 22:10). the babe Joash alone was rescued; and, for six years, the faithfulness of Jehovah's word was at stake (2Chron. 23:3).
  
  
• Hezekiah was childless, when a double assault was made by the King of Assyria and the King of Terrors (Isa. 36:1; 38:1). God's faithfulness was appealed to and relied on (Ps. 136).
  
  
• In Captivity, Haman was used to attempt the destruction of the whole nation (Est. 3:6, 12, 13. Cp. 6:1).
  
  
• Joseph's fear was worked on (Matt. 1:18-20). Notwithstanding the fact that he was "a just man", and kept the Law, he did not wish to have Mary stoned to death (Deut. 24:1); hence Joseph determined to divorce her. But God intervened : "Fear not".
  
  
• Herod sought the young Child's life (Matt. 2).
  
  
• At the Temptation, "Cast Thyself down" was Satan's temptation.
  
  
• At Nazareth, again (Luke 4), there was another attempt to cast Him down and destroy Him.
  
  
• The two storms on the Lake were other attempts.
  
  
• At length the cross was reached, and the sepulcher closed; the watch set; and the stone sealed. But "God raised Him from the dead." And now, like another Joash, He is seated and expecting (Heb. 10:12, 13), hidden in the house of God on high; and the members of "the one body" are hidden there "in Him" (Col. 3:1-3), like another Jehoshaba; and going forth to witness of His coming, like another Jehoiada (2Chron. 23:3).

The irruption of "the fallen angels" ("sons of God") was the first attempt; and was directed against the whole human race.

• When Abraham was called, then he and his seed were attacked.
  
  
• When David was enthroned, then the royal line were attacked.
  
  
• And when "the Seed of the woman" Himself came, then the storm burst upon Him.

(*1) The word "offspring" in Acts 17:28 is quite different. It is genos, which means merely kin or kind, our genus as being originated by God.
(*2) In Hos. 1:10, it is not beni-ha-Elohim, as here, but beni-el-chai.

I Corinthians 11:10 "For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

It is for this reason that the woman ought to have the power, which is the authority of that God gives to each of us, when we are in Christ. This again is written to the end generation, and our power and authority come from the Word of God. That knowledge and wisdom that is in the Word of God is where our power comes from, and we must have that wisdom in our mind or we will not stand in the day of the deception. This goes way back to Genesis 6, and it pertains to what the angels did when they came to earth. It was for this reason that the flood of Noah came to be, for Satan could not destroy the Seed, so he tried to destroy the coming of Christ through Eve's daughters.

Genesis 6:1 "And it came to pass, when the men began to multiply one the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,"

So the subject that we are trying to learn is why does a woman today ever have to protect herself from angels? Got the subject here? Daughters are born to men.

Genesis 6:2 "That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose."

"Sons of God" are the "Nephilim" or "fallen angels". They are the angels that have committed themselves to Satan in his fall in the first earth age. These fallen angels saw that the daughters of flesh men were very beautiful, and they wanted to take them for their wives. Remember that flesh man was created from the dust of the earth, and the woman was created just like the man, also from the dust of the earth as a companion for each other. These fallen angels sought to have the things of flesh man, and their experiences of marriage, without being born of woman.

Angels are supernatural beings of a different form and dimension, and these fallen angels took for themselves the daughters that they wanted. This went directly against God's plan of our flesh age. They have the power and the supernatural wisdom to take what they wanted from flesh man.

Randy Kluth said:

Not allegorization at all--simply reading between the lines.

Click to expand...

And that is even more dangerous than allegorizing. reading between th elines is a near total subjective drawing of conclusions. It syas:

"yeah God may have said this, but in reading between the lines, I THINK He meant really this...."

Randy Kluth said:

I don't know that it is. It may be a unique rendering, but is that unique rendering consistent with the Greek transliteration? Not being knowledgeable of the Bible languages, I would have to defer to you and to my brother, who is not presently accessible.

Click to expand...

Well as teh OT was originally written in Hebrew- the Greek is not germaine to the issue.

Randy Kluth said:

Talk about guess-work! You get all this from the idea that some are presently chained, and some are not?

Click to expand...

No, from places like the gospels, Ephesians 6, REv. 12, 1 Peter and other places that tellus how many angels joined with Satan in His rebellion, and teh fact that they are3 free to roam the earth as part of Satans diabolical government.

Randy Kluth said:

Again, I disagree that the term used uniquely in this instance proves what you assume, that it refers to angels. The fact it is used elsewhere for angels does not close your case either, if indeed the reference here is to human beings.

Click to expand...

Well given teh fact the only other uses in the OT are angels- it is a powerful prima facie proof than anything you can bring. God uses terms consistently. He di dnot write Scripture to leave us guessing what He meant. According to your philosophy here, the Bene-Elohim in Job could be sons of Seth then.

Randy Kluth said:

I don't think you've made a substantial argument against the use of "God's children," or "God's People," as it relates thematically with the "sons of God" in this passage. The concern always is to prevent God's people of faith from mixing with pagans, who are part of races that thrive on violence. We are to avoid the external attractiveness and incline towards what is spiritual and godly. That's the lesson--not dabbling in angelology.

Click to expand...

This is nothing more than word salad. You have made no argument to prove it means righteous men of the Seth line. All you offer is opinion and theories. Opinion and theory are our conclusions and most of the time, not what god says. Taking the passage as written without forcing into it a lot of unprovables like you have, shows that these sons of God produced a race of famous strong, valiant watchers! Nephilim in the opinions of those closest to the writers say they were a freak race.

Who Are the Nephilim? - Biblical Archaeology Society

Who Were the Nephilim? (nwcreation.net)

Who / what were the Nephilim? | GotQuestions.org

Job 1:6
Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them.

Job 2:1
Again there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them to present himself before the Lord.

Job 38:7
When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?

There is no warrant to translate Genesis 6 differently than in the only other passages it appears, other than a predisposed bias.

No where else in the OT are people called son of God
No where in teh NT are angels called sons of God.

The sons of God are contrasted with daughters of men- you have to add secondary and tertiary assumptions to hypothesize they are Sethites/Cainites or whoever you would call them.

But following sound heremeneutical principles and not adding other explanations- the sons are contrasted between God and men . Sons are of God, Daughters are of men. All this about righteous and unrighteous is added where there is no teaching known of that at this time.

Ronald Nolette said:

Well don't tell that to Abraham when He saw jesus and two angles and fed them.

Don't tell that to Lot when He housed two angels.
Don't tell that to Mary who was vidsisted by a very physical Gabriel or the women at the tomb who saw two very physical angels.

Angles take on human form when they wish to work with us and be seen.

Angels in heaven and people in heaven do not have sex, but that doesn't preclude them having sex when they take on human form. And this passage prves they do.

Click to expand...

No angels had sex when in human form. Who did they have sex with?

The sons of God were all created on the 6th day. The angels were created on day 4 as they are called the stars.

The daughters of man, were the direct descendants of Adam and Eve from Seth. Seth was born in the fallen image of Adam. Seth and his descendants are human men. Noah being the last of pre-flood Adam's offspring. After the Flood humans were in the image of Noah's 3 sons, Shem, Japheth, and Ham. Genesis 10:1

"Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood."

The sons of God are just other humans besides Adam created on the 6th day. God created many humans male and female on day 6.

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,"

The them are the sons of God.

Timtofly said:

No angels had sex when in human form. Who did they have sex with?

The sons of God were all created on the 6th day. The angels were created on day 4 as they are called the stars.

The daughters of man, were the direct descendants of Adam and Eve from Seth. Seth was born in the fallen image of Adam. Seth and his descendants are human men. Noah being the last of pre-flood Adam's offspring. After the Flood humans were in the image of Noah's 3 sons, Shem, Japheth, and Ham. Genesis 10:1

"Now these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth: and unto them were sons born after the flood."

The sons of God are just other humans besides Adam created on the 6th day. God created many humans male and female on day 6.

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth,"

The them are the sons of God.

Click to expand...

No Angel's dont have sexual relations with humans, the Nephilim teaching is Greek Mythology, a fairy tale

Ronald Nolette said:

And that is even more dangerous than allegorizing. reading between th elines is a near total subjective drawing of conclusions. It syas:

"yeah God may have said this, but in reading between the lines, I THINK He meant really this...."

Click to expand...

Drawing conclusions when things are being suggested is reasonable. It is not a contradiction, nor is it "adding something inconsistent." Can you imagine that I accuse you of "thinking something?"

Ronald Nolette said:

Well as teh OT was originally written in Hebrew- the Greek is not germaine to the issue.

Click to expand...

Why wouldn't the Septuagint be "germane?" After all, biblical authors quoted it. If they can, so can we. And it may help us understand how the Hebrew can be rendered in another language without losing its original meaning.

Ronald Nolette said:

No, from places like the gospels, Ephesians 6, REv. 12, 1 Peter and other places that tellus how many angels joined with Satan in His rebellion, and teh fact that they are3 free to roam the earth as part of Satans diabolical government.

Click to expand...

Well, it may be interesting trying to tie all of these tidbits together to form an "angelology." But the simple truth is, we are discouraged from pursuing these kinds of celestial revelations. It is similar to fortune telling and the occult.

Ronald Nolette said:

Well given teh fact the only other uses in the OT are angels- it is a powerful prima facie proof than anything you can bring. God uses terms consistently. He di dnot write Scripture to leave us guessing what He meant. According to your philosophy here, the Bene-Elohim in Job could be sons of Seth then.

Click to expand...

Sounds like an interpretive fallacy. Words and phrases mean what they mean based on the context in which they are used. They do not always retain the same meaning in all instances. Can you imagine my calling you a "stick in the mud" and insist the meaning of the phrase remain consistent with its normal use? I could see clouds passing over that look like men with halos and call them "children of God!"

The "host of heaven" may refer either to angels or to the stars. The "sons of God," therefore, may refer to either angels or men. Your argument doesn't work--you need to rely on the context.

Ronald Nolette said:

This is nothing more than word salad. You have made no argument to prove it means righteous men of the Seth line. All you offer is opinion and theories.

Click to expand...

And your own opinions are just that, as well. Doesn't prove anything.

Ronald Nolette said:

Opinion and theory are our conclusions and most of the time, not what god says.

Click to expand...

Not at all. Many of our opinions about what the Scriptures mean are correct opinions. I wouldn't expect an unbeliever to have the right opinions, though.

Ronald Nolette said:

No where else in the OT are people called son of God
No where in teh NT are angels called sons of God.

Click to expand...

Angels are not talked about much, period. Everywhere in the OT Israel is called God's People, which translates to "children of God."

theefaith said:

Who are the sons of God?

Click to expand...

"When men began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were fair; and they took to wife such of them as they chose. Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for he is flesh, but his days shall be a hundred and twenty years. "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.


Transliteration: šēm
Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon - Sons of men (Gen. 6:4) --- "famous men"
Outline of Biblical Usage : name, reputation, fame, glory,

My research says that "the sons of God" refer to those descendants of Seth who trusted in the Lord but whose children intermarried with women descended from Cain. The marriage union was not with angels but one consummated between the godly and ungodly families of men. Angels neither marry nor are given in marriage so that the verse hardly applies to them.

This was with the generation of Noah just prior to the flood where God speaks of his judgment indicating that he is displeased with the wickedness of men and therefore decides to destroy that entire generation - with the exception of Noah's family.

This is a great "shadow" of what of the next and final destruction of all unbelievers at the end of this age will be like but with fire this time instead of water. Sodom and Gomorrah is the "mini-foreshadow" of that Last Day event.

This "flood" was due to "believers intermarrying with "unbelievers" just as the Samaritans had done at the time of Jesus; Jews intermarried with the Assyrians while they were in captivity. Then the "devout" Jews of Judah considered the Samaritans to be "defiled."

I also see our present day status of our so-called "Christian" country as being the same as the Noahadic flood conditions of Noah's time as well as the same conditions that Lot was under with the Sodomites of Sodom and Gomorrah that was destroyed for their ungodliness. Is not our country just like those times? I think so. God's "church" is in many ways now barely recognizable as a "true Christian church."